Which one is 191, please? David R Huberman Microsoft Corporation Senior IT/OPS Program Manager (GFS)
________________________________________ From: Owen DeLong <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, November 25, 2013 3:40:05 PM To: David Huberman Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Bootstrapping new entrants after IPv4 exhaustion I actually like and could support this. (Though I don’t think it’s a panacea for the ISP vs. end-user debate in its entirety, from a policy perspective, I’m fine with the policy as expressed.) The one caveat is that I wouldn’t want to see this implemented in such a way that it would potentially interfere with what is currently known as proposal 191 if that achieves consensus (which I think is likely). Owen On Nov 25, 2013, at 12:45 PM, David Huberman <[email protected]> wrote: > Scott wrote: > >> I'm not sure it's all that helpful to ask me to re-justify the entire NRPM. >> That requirement, in a more strict form, is what is present in the NRPM >> today. > > But we can't make policy for policy's sake. ARIN exists to, in part, provide > number resources to the operator community who needs them. Section 4 of the > NRPPM serves the needs of the network operator community circa 1996, not 2014 > and beyond. So how about: > > 4.2.0: > > An ISP can obtain an initial allocation of a /24 or larger by demonstrating a > need to use at least 25% of the space within 90 days, and at least 50% of the > space within one year. > > 4.2.1 > > An ISP can obtain an additional allocations by demonstrating 80% or better > utilization of existing address space. The additional allocation block size > determination uses the criterion in 4.2.0 > > 4.3.0 > > An end-user can obtain an initial assignment of a /24 or larger by > demonstrating a need to use at least 25% of the space within 90 days, and at > least 50% of the space within one year. > > 4.3.1 > > An end-user can obtain an additional assignment by demonstrating 80% or > better utilization of existing address space. The additional assignment block > size determination uses the criterion in 4.3.0 > > Throw in a section on SWIP, keep 4.5 MDN as-is, and presto, you're done with > section 4, and you've fixed NRPM 8.3 and you've harmonized the very broken > ISP v End-user mechanic. > > Doesn't this serve the network operator community in 2014 better than making > small changes to walls and walls of text from 1996? > > David R Huberman > Microsoft Corporation > Senior IT/OPS Program Manager (GFS) > _______________________________________________ > PPML > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to > the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues. _______________________________________________ PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
